Kurt... why does the partisanship even matter? It's just there to give the rest of us an ILLUSION of choice. Name the poison if you like, Republican or Democrat, but at the end of the day, it is still poison and will still sicken and eventually kill you. They've ALL been paid off to favor some wealthy party and make/bend the rules in their favor, because in our system he who has the gold ALWAYS makes the rules, and for some reason that I will NEVER comprehend, it doesn't seem to matter to anyone whether the people who have the gold are greedy sociopaths. And we are their "human resources", indeed - ready to be strip-mined and then discarded with the dross and tailings in their never-ending search for more gold.
In the big picture, we're neither a democracy nor a republic. We're an oligarchy, in truth, as is nearly every ruling system in the world, at its core, but few want to admit it. And we are also representative of the cycle seen throughout history. There have been a few variations, and the methods have changed a bit thanks to modern times, but on the whole, the story remains the same: wealthy oligarchs crush the rest under heel, until the rest finally refuse to take it anymore, rise up, and either allow the overloaded, bloated system to crash, or actively overthrow/reform the system (whether violently or peacefully). A new system arises, which a wealthy few begin to corrupt to their own benefit within a few decades, if not from inception... they dare not do too much too soon, of course, with the reforms so freshly in mind. So the people enjoy a few generations of relative prosperity, but the oligarchs continue their creeping march of greed and start to crush them under heel... repeat ad nauseum, every few hundred years. So if you want to know what will happen next, just consult your history books - human nature is constant and does not change much if at all, so the outcome will be more or less the same, and the cycle will continue.
Don't get me wrong, I'm no anarchist. I think people love organization and authority structures far too much for true anarchy to be a realistic or even a preferable end. But, I know history and human nature. We just don't want to admit that our system is just as deeply flawed as any other, because that would mean, by extension, admitting that America is not intrinsically better than anyplace else. It's foolish hubris.
"The backbiting side of the gay disorder is anything but passive...it is mean to the core...it is terrorist bomb throwing (figuratively) activity like this attack on Loma's mainstream belief."
How on earth is a simple protest letter at ALL, even REMOTELY, like a terrorist bomb? And why do "mainstream beliefs" (which, I might point out, aren't so mainstream anymore) automatically shield someone from any possible scrutiny or protest from someone who doesn't agree with them? This country was founded on the principle that it's OKAY to speak your mind, even when you disagree with other people, and you can still be a nation united.
Sakes, get a grip. Nobody is out to get you, although they undoubtedly think you're pretty paranoid.
Silly TejonTech. I'm pretty sure that terrorists don't bother writing letters. From what I've seen, terrorists usually resort to threats, violence and criminal or inhumane acts almost instantly, and I don't see any threat of such in that letter, either, nor a threat of stalking (which is what I infer from your phrase "either embrace their beliefs or they are after you.")
Do you always use such unnecessarily extreme terminology against everyone who disagrees with you? Are they all "terrorists" just because you're at odds with their lifestyle? In your book, the only people allowed to have free speech or the right to contact the people in their government to protest anything, are people who think/believe the same way as you. Am I correct? If that is the case, then unfortunately for you, the Constitution and common sense both disagree with you.
Perhaps, to get a look at real terrorists and what they're like, you should plan a trip to Central America or the Middle East. Then you can come back here and be thankful that the people you disagree with here generally act very civilly, and you can move on to disagreeing with them in a civil way, yourself, instead of calling them nasty names that compare them directly to violent criminals.
I have to wonder what they think they're protecting anyone from by banning regulated growth and legal sales. No "pothead" I've ever heard of has ever gotten violent, picked a fight, or beaten anyone up while high (on JUST cannabis), unless you count decimating a whole bag of cheetos in one sitting as being violent. Alcohol, on the other hand..... has quite a history. Just take a look at the news to see stories of both adults and children being abused beaten, raped, and murdered by someone who was drinking. Yet we're willing to trust a person's personal judgment with THAT dangerous drug, for the sake of the millions of other people who drink casually and know better than to make it a lifestyle.
Ah, well. If I were to partake, I'd rather grow it myself for myself than buy it from some unregulated backyard/black market operation (which is all that we'll have left, now, unless we take our business outside the county and give that place our tax dollars). At least then I could be sure that it wasn't adulterated with something. Without regulation, there's little or no accountability. All I can think is they're trying to create a situation where something bad can happen, so they can point and go "see! Marijuana kills people and destroys neighborhoods!" without acknowledging that it was actually a lack of regulation and testing, and a proliferation of people who don't know what they're doing/are trying to make a fast buck that ACTUALLY caused the problem.
All content © Copyright 2016, The Colorado Springs Independent
Website powered by Foundation